![]() |
Hi YesButNo! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:02, 21 December 2016 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm
Denisarona. I wanted to let you know that one or more of
your recent contributions to
Francisco Pizarro have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
Denisarona (
talk)
10:40, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.-- Kintetsubuffalo ( talk) 10:55, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi YesButNo -
I noticed that you've been having a frustrating time at Francisco Pizarro and I thought I would reach out to help to the limited extent that I can do so. I saw your edit summary that you feel like people are ganging up on you, but I can assure you that the reality is much simpler. You've removed the disambiguation hatnote from this page several times, and the reverts simply represent multiple experienced editors who are trying to let you know that your edits fall outside of WP guidelines.
It seems like this all stems from confusion over the purpose of disambiguation, which is simply the process we use on WP to distinguish between entries on subjects that share the same name (a common occurrence on WP). Disambiguation doesn't really have much to do with how notable or obscure a subject is; it just helps our readers get to the intended article with the least possible fuss.
Pizarro the explorer is, by far and away, more widely known; therefore, he gets the page named Francisco Pizarro. The Chilean athlete is more obscure, so his entry gets to settle for the name Francisco Pizarro (footballer). However, it would be terrible if a person in Chile typed in Francisco Pizarro looking for the football player and got "stuck" at the explorer's page. For that reason, we put the hatnote at the top of Pizarro the explorer's page. We aren't saying that we think that Pizarro the footballer is popular or great. We are simply saying, "Hey, if you typed in Francisco Pizarro, you're probably looking for this explorer guy. However, on the off chance that you're looking for this other article, here is that link too."
I hope this helps you to understand disambiguation, and I hope that you'll consider reverting your own changes to the Pizarro entry, now that you can see that there is no concern about a subject being too obscure for a hatnote. It looks like some people are growing concerned about your tendency toward edit warring on this subject, and if you reverted your own change to the entry, I think that would reassure your fellow editors that you have maturity and an ability to learn from your mistakes. EricEnfermero ( Talk) 12:03, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for
your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a
general rule, talk pages such as
Talk:Rastafari are for discussion related to improving the article,
not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting
our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you.
Doug Weller
talk
06:14, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
![]() |
Hi YesButNo! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:02, 21 December 2016 (UTC) |
Hello, I'm
Denisarona. I wanted to let you know that one or more of
your recent contributions to
Francisco Pizarro have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the
sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
my talk page. Thanks.
Denisarona (
talk)
10:40, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.-- Kintetsubuffalo ( talk) 10:55, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi YesButNo -
I noticed that you've been having a frustrating time at Francisco Pizarro and I thought I would reach out to help to the limited extent that I can do so. I saw your edit summary that you feel like people are ganging up on you, but I can assure you that the reality is much simpler. You've removed the disambiguation hatnote from this page several times, and the reverts simply represent multiple experienced editors who are trying to let you know that your edits fall outside of WP guidelines.
It seems like this all stems from confusion over the purpose of disambiguation, which is simply the process we use on WP to distinguish between entries on subjects that share the same name (a common occurrence on WP). Disambiguation doesn't really have much to do with how notable or obscure a subject is; it just helps our readers get to the intended article with the least possible fuss.
Pizarro the explorer is, by far and away, more widely known; therefore, he gets the page named Francisco Pizarro. The Chilean athlete is more obscure, so his entry gets to settle for the name Francisco Pizarro (footballer). However, it would be terrible if a person in Chile typed in Francisco Pizarro looking for the football player and got "stuck" at the explorer's page. For that reason, we put the hatnote at the top of Pizarro the explorer's page. We aren't saying that we think that Pizarro the footballer is popular or great. We are simply saying, "Hey, if you typed in Francisco Pizarro, you're probably looking for this explorer guy. However, on the off chance that you're looking for this other article, here is that link too."
I hope this helps you to understand disambiguation, and I hope that you'll consider reverting your own changes to the Pizarro entry, now that you can see that there is no concern about a subject being too obscure for a hatnote. It looks like some people are growing concerned about your tendency toward edit warring on this subject, and if you reverted your own change to the entry, I think that would reassure your fellow editors that you have maturity and an ability to learn from your mistakes. EricEnfermero ( Talk) 12:03, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for
your contributions. I am glad to see that you are discussing a topic. However, as a
general rule, talk pages such as
Talk:Rastafari are for discussion related to improving the article,
not general discussion about the topic or unrelated topics. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting
our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. Thank you.
Doug Weller
talk
06:14, 17 January 2017 (UTC)